When Will Federer Actually Decline? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

When Will Federer Actually Decline?

lessthanjake
02-12-2010, 08:32 AM
There has been a lot of talk in recent years about Federer declining and being done. After Federer lost in the 2008 Australian Open semis, he looked vulnerable. He looked even more vulnerable after getting crushed in the 2008 French Open. It seemed to most of us, including me, that the tipping point was the 2008 Wimbledon finals in which he lost to Nadal. That seemed to indicate that there was one hurdle he just could not overcome (ie. Nadal) and that he might be too mentally defeated to win slams anymore. Of course, as we know, Federer went on to win the US Open, which proved he could still win slams. However, the questioning came back after the 2009 Australian Open. It still seemed that he was going to have a really tough time mentally in slams. However, he came back and won RG and Wimbledon back to back. He then had kids, had broken the slam record, and lost in the US Open finals to a young Del Potro. Some people expected him to decline simply because the motivation would no longer be there and the up and coming players would have the motivation. However, he managed to win the 2010 Australian Open.

Personally, I have doubted Federer a ton over the last couple years. There have been multiple points where I thought he was done (particularly after 2008 Wimbledon and 2009 Australian Open). But he keeps coming back. ANd lately, I have read multiple articles where writers are saying that we can NEVER count out Federer, and that it would be silly to predict that he will not win slams.

But, the fact is, that at some point, he WILL stop winning slams. We cant just keep assuming that he will win again and again, because it will stop eventually. His semifinal streak will get broken. He will stop being a virtual shoe in for slam finals. And he will stop winning slams every year. But when will that be? It has to be some point, and I think it will be random and rather hard to see coming.

I think that Federer will continue dominating this year. However, next year Federer will suddenly no longer be the shoe in to go to the final rounds of slams that he is now. I think he will still win a slam next year, but he will also go out in the quarterfinals or fourth round of a couple of them. Then in 2012, I think he will fail to win a slam, but will make some deep runs (maybe a finals, certainly a semis).

Speed of Light
02-12-2010, 09:03 AM
I believe the real question here is 'When will the mug era actually grow some balls and cut short this sissy's rein?'. It is hard to imagine such an old man with no real movement and piss poor backhand winning slams in any other era.. any unbiased person can see that. This over-inflated ego is the product of years of choking mugs, pushers, clowns and fixers that have plagued tennis and he will only decline when tennis rises from the ashes.
But till this glorious day arrives and this dark age ends we must tolerate the Ego Lord and his gloryhunting fans for the sake of tennis.

king_roger
02-12-2010, 09:16 AM
I believe the real question here is 'When will the mug era actually grow some balls and cut short this sissy's rein?'. It is hard to imagine such an old man with no real movement and piss poor backhand winning slams in any other era.. any unbiased person can see that. This over-inflated ego is the product of years of choking mugs, pushers, clowns and fixers that have plagued tennis and he will only decline when tennis rises from the ashes.
But till this glorious day arrives and this dark age ends we must tolerate the Ego Lord and his gloryhunting fans for the sake of tennis.


:haha: :haha:

you have outdone yourself.... :retard:

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 09:17 AM
This over-inflated ego is the product of years of choking mugs, pushers, clowns and fixers that have plagued tennis and he will only decline when tennis rises from the ashes.
But till this glorious day arrives and this dark age ends we must tolerate the Ego Lord and his gloryhunting fans for the sake of tennis.

Too bad Rafito is so average that he can't seem to get past those joke of players most of the time... :awww:

paseo
02-12-2010, 09:56 AM
I believe the real question here is 'When will the mug era actually grow some balls and cut short this sissy's rein?'. It is hard to imagine such an old man with no real movement and piss poor backhand winning slams in any other era.. any unbiased person can see that. This over-inflated ego is the product of years of choking mugs, pushers, clowns and fixers that have plagued tennis and he will only decline when tennis rises from the ashes.
But till this glorious day arrives and this dark age ends we must tolerate the Ego Lord and his gloryhunting fans for the sake of tennis.

:D

manadrainer
02-12-2010, 10:01 AM
I believe the real question here is 'When will the mug era actually grow some balls and cut short this sissy's rein?'. It is hard to imagine such an old man with no real movement and piss poor backhand winning slams in any other era.. any unbiased person can see that. This over-inflated ego is the product of years of choking mugs, pushers, clowns and fixers that have plagued tennis and he will only decline when tennis rises from the ashes.
But till this glorious day arrives and this dark age ends we must tolerate the Ego Lord and his gloryhunting fans for the sake of tennis.

Too bad Rafito in the process of staying close to the "old man with no real movement" destroyed his knees and body...
:haha::haha:

Puschkin
02-12-2010, 10:10 AM
:zzz:

federersforehand
02-12-2010, 10:21 AM
no real movement? are you for real?

GugaF1
02-12-2010, 11:11 AM
My Gosh people Federer is 28 eight years old. Get real. In most sports that would only about half way into a career.

Sure tennis usually has a shorter spam, but still we are talking about a 28 year old guy here. With one of the smoother game ever. Is plain ridiculous to talk about a guy still in his tweenties in that manner.

Wait he is at least into his 30 to have some kind of reasoning. And even so a lot of players began playing some of their best tennis into their early thirties...Henman, Moya, Lubjicic, Kiefer, Haas, Davydenko is nearly 29 and is having his best period ever..


I think people are getting the wrong idea because some guys area breaking out so soon, such as Djokovic, Nadal, Del Potro and Cilic. Federer had a more common blossing, starting playing his best tennis just around 22-23. So lose that talk... doesn't make sense in the time being.

gulzhan
02-12-2010, 11:19 AM
When Nadal will be back in full form or when Djokovic and Murray will grow up and mature (and sort out all their problems with gfs).

Commander Data
02-12-2010, 11:19 AM
Federer will go on winning Slams until the Fedhaters give up and kiss the GOATS feet.

abraxas21
02-12-2010, 11:44 AM
The day after he retires...

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 11:46 AM
When Nadal will be back in full form or when Djokovic and Murray will grow up and mature (and sort out all their problems with gfs).

Oh wait, if Murray and Djokovic get owned more often than not by Fed it's because of their gfs... How could it be otherwise :scratch:

:retard:

Dini
02-12-2010, 12:02 PM
When he loses his movement. From what I saw in the Murray-Fed final, his movement was up with the best I've seen it.

Forget the serve, Federer not moving well loses all timing and precision. He starts spraying errors left, right and centre (and into the net :lol:) continually. He can afford to have a low first serve percentage but move well. For example, Cinci SF and F he didn't serve as well as he can but moved beautifully and took the ball on so early and it made his serve look secondary. I personally don't think he's got many years left at the very top. Many people talk about Connors and Rosewall, about how they played into their late 30s and still had success. The game nowadays is much more physical though, and even if Fed's game is not as taxing on the body it'll eventually catch up with him. It's easy to overlook how many long and gruelling matches he's had to grind out because usually it looks quite effortless.

I predict majors will continue to be his most successful tournaments, but eventually biological decline will kick in. We thought it had already happened in 2008 when he looked to be a step slow but of late that seems to be more and more of a temporary blip in his form rather than something that continued.

hiperborejac
02-12-2010, 12:04 PM
Never!

Sophocles
02-12-2010, 12:08 PM
If by decline you mean getting to the point when he's no longer good enough to win slams, probably when he's about 32. If you mean playing slightly worse than at his peak, the decline started in 2007, but was made to look worse in 2008 by the lingering effects of mono.

abraxas21
02-12-2010, 01:21 PM
Grandpa' Fed won't ever decline. He'll rule tennis for a thousand years.

MrChopin
02-12-2010, 01:54 PM
Federer will go on winning Slams until the Fedhaters give up and kiss the GOATS feet.

This

marcRD
02-12-2010, 02:03 PM
His decline is going in slow motion, but I wonder what motivates him by now. Sampras motivation was mostly to get to nr13, Federer seems to be more addicted to the game, his easygoing style and playful game is just very fun which helps alot in any kind of job. My theory is that he is simply having fun out there, except some hard sessions in Dubai for a few weeks Federer is having fun and taking it easy in training sessions and in matches and likes traveling around alot. This guy seems to live for the audiance's applause after a beautiful point as much as adding titles to his resume. Kind of a mix between Fabrice Santoro and Pete Sampras....

I can see Federer playing tennis at 37-38, I really wouldnt be surprised if he still could make great runs in Wimbledon at that age. 2020 we may actually see Federer get to his last Wimbledon final after having played at 4 different decades against 6 different generations. Yes, it is improbable but far from impossible.

Sophocles
02-12-2010, 02:08 PM
Kind of a mix between Fabrice Santoro and Pete Sampras....

Yeah, I like this thought.

tennizen
02-12-2010, 02:26 PM
If by decline you mean getting to the point when he's no longer good enough to win slams, probably when he's about 32. If you mean playing slightly worse than at his peak, the decline started in 2007, but was made to look worse in 2008 by the lingering effects of mono.

:lol:

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 02:27 PM
Still denying mono, Hema? :awww: :zzz: :yawn:

Commander Data
02-12-2010, 02:31 PM
Still denying mono, Hema? :awww: :zzz: :yawn:

Your sig would earn you some good buddies in the middle east. It all fits, the minaret debate making it a full circle. Maybe you should move to Iran? there you have minarets and like-minded people at one place.

Sophocles
02-12-2010, 02:33 PM
But to the girdle do the gods inherit; beneath is all the fiend's.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

tennizen
02-12-2010, 02:47 PM
Still denying mono, Hema? :awww: :zzz: :yawn:

How could I? I think he would easily have won that fifth set at Wimbledon if his eye sight were not so affected by mono.

Everko
02-12-2010, 03:04 PM
He is on the downfall now. Soon the chokers will turn into men

lessthanjake
02-12-2010, 03:10 PM
If by decline you mean getting to the point when he's no longer good enough to win slams, probably when he's about 32. If you mean playing slightly worse than at his peak, the decline started in 2007, but was made to look worse in 2008 by the lingering effects of mono.

I mean a lot of things. MOstly, by decline, I mean getting the point where he is no longer good enough to win slams. But I also mean when he will get to the period before that where he CAN win slams, but he won't basically make every single finals, but instead will take some losses in much earlier rounds.

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 03:17 PM
How could I? I think he would easily have won that fifth set at Wimbledon if his eye sight were not so affected by mono.

He would have closed it out in 3 easy sets without mono :shrug:

tennizen
02-12-2010, 03:18 PM
He would have closed it out in 3 easy sets without mono :shrug:

Like the previous year's final?

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 03:18 PM
Your sig would earn you some good buddies in the middle east. It all fits, the minaret debate making it a full circle. Maybe you should move to Iran? there you have minarets and like-minded people at one place.

:retard:

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 03:19 PM
Like the previous year's final?

Even the GOAT has its off days... :o

manadrainer
02-12-2010, 03:23 PM
I think he can win 1/2 slams in 2011, 1/2 in 2012, 1 in 2013 and that maybe he can go slamless in 2014 (if he's still playing).

tennizen
02-12-2010, 03:23 PM
Even the GOAT has its off days... :o

No, he doesn't:hug: I think his mono started in 2007 . How could he have lost to Canas twice otherwise.

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 03:25 PM
No, he doesn't:hug: I think his mono started in 2007 . How could he have lost to Canas twice otherwise.

The clay GOAT lost badly in his backyard to Soderling :shrug: that's the magic of the sport... :o

tennizen
02-12-2010, 03:27 PM
The clay GOAT lost badly in his backyard to Soderling :shrug: that's the magic of the sport... :o

Knee injury.

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 03:28 PM
Knee injury.

You mean that knee that is injured since 2005 and that prevented him from doing anything of relevance at USO for years? :awww:

Commander Data
02-12-2010, 03:31 PM
No, he doesn't:hug: I think his mono started in 2007 . How could he have lost to Canas twice otherwise.

Back injury

tennizen
02-12-2010, 03:41 PM
You mean that knee that is injured since 2005 and that prevented him from doing anything of relevance at USO for years? :awww:

Yes:sad: Just like the mono that prevented Roger from doing anything worthwhile in later stages of slams and MS tournaments in 2008.

Back injury

No

IW 2007- Wimbledon 2007- Mono (except Hamburg 2007)

AO 2008- USO 2008- Mono

Shanghai 2008- Rome 2009- Back injury

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 03:46 PM
Yes:sad: Just like the mono that prevented Roger from doing anything worthwhile in later stages of slams and MS tournaments in 2008.

I see :awww: thanks god mono is softer than a knee injury, at least Fed managed to fight his way to the slam semis or finals, unlike Rafito :awww: :hug:

tennizen
02-12-2010, 03:56 PM
I see :awww: thanks god mono is softer than a knee injury, at least Fed managed to fight his way to the slam semis or finals, unlike Rafito :awww: :hug:

Yes, Rafito is unlucky that way:sad:

Persimmon
02-12-2010, 04:07 PM
Not anytime soon.

HKz
02-12-2010, 04:16 PM
There has been a lot of talk in recent years about Federer declining and being done. After Federer lost in the 2008 Australian Open semis, he looked vulnerable. He looked even more vulnerable after getting crushed in the 2008 French Open. It seemed to most of us, including me, that the tipping point was the 2008 Wimbledon finals in which he lost to Nadal. That seemed to indicate that there was one hurdle he just could not overcome (ie. Nadal) and that he might be too mentally defeated to win slams anymore. Of course, as we know, Federer went on to win the US Open, which proved he could still win slams. However, the questioning came back after the 2009 Australian Open. It still seemed that he was going to have a really tough time mentally in slams. However, he came back and won RG and Wimbledon back to back. He then had kids, had broken the slam record, and lost in the US Open finals to a young Del Potro. Some people expected him to decline simply because the motivation would no longer be there and the up and coming players would have the motivation. However, he managed to win the 2010 Australian Open.

Personally, I have doubted Federer a ton over the last couple years. There have been multiple points where I thought he was done (particularly after 2008 Wimbledon and 2009 Australian Open). But he keeps coming back. ANd lately, I have read multiple articles where writers are saying that we can NEVER count out Federer, and that it would be silly to predict that he will not win slams.

But, the fact is, that at some point, he WILL stop winning slams. We cant just keep assuming that he will win again and again, because it will stop eventually. His semifinal streak will get broken. He will stop being a virtual shoe in for slam finals. And he will stop winning slams every year. But when will that be? It has to be some point, and I think it will be random and rather hard to see coming.

I think that Federer will continue dominating this year. However, next year Federer will suddenly no longer be the shoe in to go to the final rounds of slams that he is now. I think he will still win a slam next year, but he will also go out in the quarterfinals or fourth round of a couple of them. Then in 2012, I think he will fail to win a slam, but will make some deep runs (maybe a finals, certainly a semis).

Hmm...

lessthanjake
02-12-2010, 04:20 PM
Hmm...

Hahaha I'm a pessimist, what can I say?

But honestly, his winning WILL stop at some point, and I think it will be random and unexpected.

HKz
02-12-2010, 04:23 PM
Hahaha I'm a pessimist, what can I say?

But honestly, his winning WILL stop at some point, and I think it will be random and unexpected.

Well of course, but if that was the point of the thread, which it seems it was, it is kind of useless to write because it is obvious that everything has a stopping point. Personally, I couldn't tell you when any of these top players can start declining, especially in Roger's case. I mean, it is hard to enough to tell where Rafael is in his career. But to be able to tell when Roger will be done when he is still the top ranked player and winning slams is nearly impossible right now.

bokehlicious
02-12-2010, 04:24 PM
In a way I hope it does happen soon... Maybe that way the numerous poor pissed haters will finally tone down and give us a break........... Maybe :o

Sophocles
02-12-2010, 04:25 PM
In a way I hope it does happen soon... Maybe that way the numerous poor pissed haters will finally tone down and give us a break........... Maybe :o

Don't think like that. You're letting them win.

GugaF1
02-12-2010, 05:00 PM
This turned into a high quality thread.

Why don't you guys do mono coding words discussions like:

"Knees" ok "Mono" hm "Canas" ah "Soderling"...you don't even need to write sentences. Just put it on mindless automatic pilot

sammy01
02-12-2010, 05:38 PM
there will be no one day or tournament. federer has declined in some ways already in that he no longer dominates the tour the way he did and more than just 1 or 2 players get wins over him these days.

these things are gradual, he wont suddently become shit, be he will however lose grip on things. as for when this will happen who knows. you cant put a timeframe on it because no one knows what other things/players will do.

SetSampras
02-12-2010, 05:54 PM
He has declined. Actually he is very beatable today. Unfortunately, the clowns today still cant do anything about it outside of Del Potro or Nadal. Federer was on the verge of losing in both Wimbledon and the French Open last year. He scraped those out by the skin of his teeth. Had Roddick not of choke to go up 2 sets to 1 he would have 2 slams right now. Hass or Del Potro had Fed beat at the French. The AO no one really had Fed. Davydenko was destroying him before headcase Russian Joseph Stalin mode hit and Fed somehow won the next 13 games.


So Fed has declined obviously but it doesnt change the fact that Players are still in awe of him and happy just to be on the same court and not standing up having the balls, going for the jugular and making a career for themselves. Only Del Potro and Nadal seem to have this inherent ability to treat Fed as a fucking OPPONENT and not some tennis demigod as others who voluntarily bend over and take it up the sphincter to Fed's all seen prescence

Mosquito3
02-12-2010, 05:55 PM
Knee injury.

You mean that knee that is injured since 2005 and that prevented him from doing anything of relevance at USO for years? :awww:


Please stop! Everyone knows that only nadal can be injuryed :o

Persimmon
02-12-2010, 06:00 PM
He has declined. Actually he is very beatable today. Unfortunately, the clowns today still cant do anything about it outside of Del Potro or Nadal.

Only Del Potro and Nadal seem to have this inherent ability to treat Fed as a fucking OPPONENT and not some tennis demigod as others who voluntarily bend over and take it up the sphincter to Fed's all seen prescence.



Del Potro and Nadal are injured most of the time anyway.:o

SetSampras
02-12-2010, 06:02 PM
Del Potro and Nadal are injured most of the time anyway.:o

Exactly.. which is the only reason why Federer has had the run of the yard since the French last year. We all know Djoker and Murray dont have what it takes to be champions. They may have some of the ability but dont have the nerves, the champions mindset etc.

Jōris
02-12-2010, 06:13 PM
By my calculations.. approximately 17 October, 2013 14:37, give or take a few minutes.

Sophocles
02-12-2010, 06:39 PM
He has declined. Actually he is very beatable today. Unfortunately, the clowns today still cant do anything about it outside of Del Potro or Nadal. Federer was on the verge of losing in both Wimbledon and the French Open last year. He scraped those out by the skin of his teeth. Had Roddick not of choke to go up 2 sets to 1 he would have 2 slams right now. Hass or Del Potro had Fed beat at the French. The AO no one really had Fed. Davydenko was destroying him before headcase Russian Joseph Stalin mode hit and Fed somehow won the next 13 games.


So Fed has declined obviously but it doesnt change the fact that Players are still in awe of him and happy just to be on the same court and not standing up having the balls, going for the jugular and making a career for themselves. Only Del Potro and Nadal seem to have this inherent ability to treat Fed as a fucking OPPONENT and not some tennis demigod as others who voluntarily bend over and take it up the sphincter to Fed's all seen prescence

Presumably every close match Sampras won, his opponent choked - right?

lessthanjake
02-12-2010, 07:01 PM
He has declined. Actually he is very beatable today. Unfortunately, the clowns today still cant do anything about it outside of Del Potro or Nadal. Federer was on the verge of losing in both Wimbledon and the French Open last year. He scraped those out by the skin of his teeth. Had Roddick not of choke to go up 2 sets to 1 he would have 2 slams right now. Hass or Del Potro had Fed beat at the French. The AO no one really had Fed. Davydenko was destroying him before headcase Russian Joseph Stalin mode hit and Fed somehow won the next 13 games.


So Fed has declined obviously but it doesnt change the fact that Players are still in awe of him and happy just to be on the same court and not standing up having the balls, going for the jugular and making a career for themselves. Only Del Potro and Nadal seem to have this inherent ability to treat Fed as a fucking OPPONENT and not some tennis demigod as others who voluntarily bend over and take it up the sphincter to Fed's all seen prescence

This is obviously silly. Before the US Open last year, you were almost certainly calling Del Potro a clown who didnt have what it took to not bend over for Federer. Then he managed to squeak a slam win past Federer and suddenly he isnt like that anymore? No. All of the top players are really good and COULD beat Federer, just like Del Potro did. It just hasnt happened because beating Federer takes having an extremely good day, combined with Federer not being quite at his best. In big matches, those two things rarely coincide (though they sometimes do, as we saw in the 2009 US Open final)

barbadosan
02-12-2010, 07:30 PM
This is obviously silly. Before the US Open last year, you were almost certainly calling Del Potro a clown who didnt have what it took to not bend over for Federer. Then he managed to squeak a slam win past Federer and suddenly he isnt like that anymore? No. All of the top players are really good and COULD beat Federer, just like Del Potro did. It just hasnt happened because beating Federer takes having an extremely good day, combined with Federer not being quite at his best. In big matches, those two things rarely coincide (though they sometimes do, as we saw in the 2009 US Open final)

jake: no point arguing that with SetSampras. As far as he is concerned, Fed did not win a single one (or very few) of his 16 GS on the merits of his play; miraculously, and defying all known odds, nearly every one, if not all, of his opponents simply choked (or the other litany of options he chooses to detail) :)

Fed=ATPTourkilla
02-12-2010, 07:43 PM
Wouldn't it be funny if he just kept on winning Slams till he was about 36? :) The haters would still be typing frantically away, frothing at the mouth..."Weak era"..."The other players have no balls"...

When we see a 36 year old Fed winning his 32nd Slam, they'll still be whining away... "This weak era has lasted for 20 years now" (coincidentally the exact same length of Fed's career) :) :) :)

dylan24
02-12-2010, 08:19 PM
never. he is immortal.

Matt01
02-12-2010, 08:30 PM
never. he is immortal.


The question is not when he will die...

MalwareDie
02-12-2010, 10:14 PM
Del Mugro only beats Fedmug when his forehead is a piece of garbage. He stand no chance otherwise.

Dyraise
02-12-2010, 11:53 PM
This year :shrug:

BigJohn
02-13-2010, 12:46 AM
This year :shrug:

This year again?!? Not again... Darn.

Persimmon
02-13-2010, 12:58 AM
This year :shrug:

No, not yet.

Ibracadabra
02-13-2010, 02:33 AM
Agassi making slam finals at what? 35 years old? it will happen one day but i think he'll retire before his age really catches up with him.

Frufru
02-13-2010, 03:31 AM
Feds game is on decline since end of 2006. Thats more than 3 years now. Havent you guys notice it?

Hewitt =Legend
02-13-2010, 03:38 AM
Dubai.

He will get beat in the 1st round by Mohammed Al Ghareeb and announce his immediate retirement from the sport. Al Ghareeb, inspired by this win, will go on to win 30 slams in a row on his way to becoming the GOAT. Obvious really.

tennishero
02-13-2010, 03:38 AM
I believe the real question here is 'When will the mug era actually grow some balls and cut short this sissy's rein?'. It is hard to imagine such an old man with no real movement and piss poor backhand winning slams in any other era.. any unbiased person can see that. This over-inflated ego is the product of years of choking mugs, pushers, clowns and fixers that have plagued tennis and he will only decline when tennis rises from the ashes.
But till this glorious day arrives and this dark age ends we must tolerate the Ego Lord and his gloryhunting fans for the sake of tennis.

A+ would read again.

swisht4u
02-13-2010, 06:26 AM
Fed has already declined.

A few years back many declared the new powerful ERA for Fed's decline. Especially at 09 AO.

Novak, Potro, Nadal, Murray. Tsonga now and then.
Roddick with a new lease on life, Davy looking like a god himself.

What the hell happened to those crystal balls everyone had?

It makes sense now, Fed did have mono, he had back problems. Just like everyone else Fed has physical problems and lost over a year because of it.

Fed said himself, he would never take a long break like 6 months to a year, he said it is too hard to get back to top form. Look how long it took to get his game looking good. Forehand problems, then serving problems, don't forget how he was shanking balls all over.

He took care of those problems, took about a year to get everything working.

So I expect him to be taking some scalps from this DEEP field for at least 2 years and the olympics.

Commander Data
02-13-2010, 08:55 AM
Seriously; I think next Year. He has won so much I think his motivation will drop eventually. He just can't stay that sharp all the time. I still expect him to collect 1 slam a year but in 2011 I predict a noticable drop in his performance.

And seriously I don't mind that muc really. It will be time for other to shine.

aulus
02-13-2010, 10:09 AM
Federer started declining early in '07. but he was at such a high level prior to that that he is still an elite player.

he is a step slower than he was at his peak, more UE's and his return game has declined a lot.

at his peak, Federer was 1st in things like points won on return of serve and points won on 2nd serve, but since his decline, he is not.
fortunately for him, his 1st serve is better than it has ever been. when his ground game became less aggressive and more prone to errors, his serve carried him through many matches.

Federer has seemed better recently than he was for large parts of '07 and almost all of '08, though. especially his ground game seems more aggressive.


titles per year
'03: 7
'04: 11
'05: 11
'06: 12
'07: 8
'08: 4
'09: 4

losses per year
'03: 17
'04: 6
'05: 4
'06: 5
'07: 9
'08: 15
'09: 12

Matt01
02-13-2010, 10:39 AM
No disrespect to mighty Roger but if you want to be GOAT you have to win more tha 4 titles per year :o

federersforehand
02-13-2010, 10:54 AM
No disrespect to mighty Roger but if you want to be GOAT you have to win more tha 4 titles per year :o

'03: 7
'04: 11
'05: 11
'06: 12
'07: 8
'08: 4
'09: 4 can you count????????? NO HURR DURR. seriously if fed only won the 4 titles that matter a year, the slams, then i wouldnt give a damn. its weird how fed ALWAYS kicks ass in the slams, some bizarre coinicidinc really ey?

barbadosan
02-13-2010, 11:01 AM
'03: 7
'04: 11
'05: 11
'06: 12
'07: 8
'08: 4
'09: 4 can you count????????? NO HURR DURR. seriously if fed only won the 4 titles that matter a year, the slams, then i wouldnt give a damn. its weird how fed ALWAYS kicks ass in the slams, some bizarre coinicidinc really ey?

I guess Matt means a player has to win more than 4 titles a year into perpetuity - in which case, there'll never ever be a goat, heh

Eiter that, or only the current/last year ever counts

BlueSwan
02-13-2010, 11:03 AM
No disrespect to mighty Roger but if you want to be GOAT you have to win more tha 4 titles per year :o
2009 titles: Two GS titles and two Masters shields! So what if he didn't win a handful of Mickey Mouse events on top?

Matt01
02-13-2010, 11:07 AM
2009 titles: Two GS titles and two Masters shields! So what if he didn't win a handful of Mickey Mouse events on top?


If you can onyl win the Slams by sacrificing the ATP tour tournaments then maybe you are not that good overall :shrug:

barbadosan
02-13-2010, 11:39 AM
If you can onyl win the Slams by sacrificing the ATP tour tournaments then maybe you are not that good overall :shrug:

So I was right then? You're totally discounting all the years he won 7+ titles, even his record-setting 12 title year, with its consecutive win streak. o-kkkkkkkkk

Matt01
02-13-2010, 11:45 AM
So I was right then? You're totally discounting all the years he won 7+ titles, even his record-setting 12 title year, with its consecutive win streak. o-kkkkkkkkk


I'm not discounting anything but he has won only 4 tourneys two years in a row now.

elessar
02-13-2010, 12:28 PM
If you can onyl win the Slams by sacrificing the ATP tour tournaments then maybe you are not that good overall :shrug:
:lol:

Dini
02-13-2010, 12:29 PM
Wow, Matt01.

Sunset of Age
02-13-2010, 01:06 PM
Matt01, you bring up good points at times, but you're losing it, here... :rolleyes:

DrJules
02-13-2010, 01:18 PM
I'm not discounting anything but he has won only 4 tourneys two years in a row now.

Very true, 9 events since start 2008 has yielded 4 GS, 2 MS + 3 others.

king_roger
02-13-2010, 01:21 PM
Very true, 9 events since start 2007 has yielded 4 GS, 2 MS + 3 others.

2008 :)

DrJules
02-13-2010, 01:23 PM
2008 :)

Now changed.:wavey:

Baghdatis72
02-13-2010, 01:28 PM
Federer has already had his decline but managed to rise to his top form again. Concerning an actual decline then that will probably happen around 2013, if he doesn't retire before then.

Commander Data
02-13-2010, 02:08 PM
If you can onyl win the Slams by sacrificing the ATP tour tournaments then maybe you are not that good overall :shrug:

:retard:

Vida
02-13-2010, 02:31 PM
wrong thread. Wodge is in decline since 2003, but he is so good that it doesnt make any difference.

lessthanjake
02-13-2010, 04:31 PM
If you can onyl win the Slams by sacrificing the ATP tour tournaments then maybe you are not that good overall :shrug:

I don't think it is about "sacrificing" other ATP tournaments. It is just about not bringing your A-game to them because the motivation isnt there. And really, this is professional tennis. Everyone is SO good. If someone doesnt bring their A-game, they SHOULDNT win, no matter how GOAT-like they are.

I can relate to this. When I was in high school, I did debate. There were a bunch of normal regular season tournaments and then there were the big tournaments like the state championships or the national regionals (ie. the championship for my entire area of the US). I never had the motivation to prepare really at all for the regular season tournaments, so I almost never won. I would lose to people who did prepare and took them seriously. But I was a completely different debater when it came to the big tournaments I mentioned. I prepared A LOT and was extremely motivated. As a result, I was state champion and national regional champion both of my last two years of high school. I was the only kid in my state's history to have been state champion twice in high school. So I would say I was pretty good. But in those regular season tournaments, I would frequently lose to people who wouldnt even cross my mind as being a threat to me in a more important tournament.

Was I "sacrificing" those normal tournaments? Of course not. It's just my level of motivation to win them was significantly lower so I didn't bring my A-game. And if I didnt bring my A-game, there was virtually no chance of me winning because there were plenty of other good people who WERE bringing their A-game. This is the same with Federer, I think. He isnt sacrificing tournaments, he just isnt bringing his best stuff. And if you don't bring your best stuff, you shouldnt win, no matter how good you are.

BigJohn
02-13-2010, 04:39 PM
If you can onyl win the Slams by sacrificing the ATP tour tournaments then maybe you are not that good overall :shrug:

Woah dude... :worship:

Matt01
02-13-2010, 05:50 PM
Woah dude... :worship:


Thanks ;)

Byrd
02-13-2010, 05:56 PM
He's already declining, but the thing is, his recent decline in form/play is still better than most people, and his mental strength is still superior to many.

BigJohn
02-13-2010, 06:26 PM
Thanks ;)

You are welcome. :)

(Just to clarify, I implied that you must be high to write such an enlightened comment. If you are sober, then it is just retarded.)

LEGENDOFTENNIS
02-13-2010, 08:11 PM
It's evident just by watching him play to people who have seen him in 2005/6 that he has declined, but he was so much ahead of the pack then, that he is still good enough to beat anybody still. He's smarter now definetly and hes incorporated the Dropshot into his arsenal.

Knightmace
02-14-2010, 05:25 AM
2020..........................................just to be 100% sure